Skip to content

Status of testing Providers that were prepared on December 31, 2021 #20615

Closed

Description

@potiuk

Body

I have a kind request for all the contributors to the latest provider packages release.
Could you please help us to test the RC versions of the providers?

Let us know in the comment, whether the issue is addressed.

Those are providers that require testing as there were some substantial changes introduced:

Provider amazon: 2.6.0rc1

Provider apache.druid: 2.2.0rc1

Provider apache.spark: 2.0.3rc1

Provider cncf.kubernetes: 3.0.0rc1

Provider databricks: 2.2.0rc1

Provider docker: 2.4.0rc1

Provider facebook: 2.2.0rc1

Provider google: 6.3.0rc1

Provider http: 2.0.2rc1

Provider imap: 2.1.0rc1

Provider jenkins: 2.0.4rc1

Provider microsoft.azure: 3.5.0rc1

Provider mongo: 2.3.0rc1

Provider neo4j: 2.1.0rc1

Provider opsgenie: 3.0.0rc1

Provider oracle: 2.1.0rc1

Provider papermill: 2.2.0rc1

Provider sftp: 2.4.0rc1

Provider snowflake: 2.4.0rc1

Provider tableau: 2.1.3rc1

Provider yandex: 2.2.0rc1

Committer

  • I acknowledge that I am a maintainer/committer of the Apache Airflow project.

Activity

  1. added
    kind:metaHigh-level information important to the community
    on Dec 31, 2021
  2. PApostol commented on Jan 2, 2022

    @PApostol
    Contributor

    #19978 addresses the issue and works as expected.

  3. saveriogzz commented on Jan 2, 2022

    @saveriogzz
    Contributor

    #20164 all good! ✅

  4. mariotaddeucci commented on Jan 2, 2022

    @mariotaddeucci
    Contributor

    #20506 all good o/

  5. eskarimov commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @eskarimov
    Contributor

    #20536 tested, works as expected ✅

  6. bhavaniravi commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @bhavaniravi
    Contributor

    #19280 is a docstring update, no code changes

  7. alexott commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @alexott
    Contributor

    #20550 is verified, works as intended

  8. pierrejeambrun commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @pierrejeambrun
    Member

    #20263 working 👍

  9. piotrkmita commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @piotrkmita
    Contributor

    #19984 tested. It's working as expected.

  10. harishkrao commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @harishkrao
    Contributor

    #20509 tested, working as expected.

  11. raphaelauv commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @raphaelauv
    Contributor

    Simplify KubernetesPodOperator (#19572)

    I tried different scenario it work correctly

  12. jon-fearer commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @jon-fearer
    Contributor

    #20001 Looks good

  13. kazanzhy commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @kazanzhy
    Contributor

    #20145 is devoted to the documentation
    #20091 tests also changed as well

    Looks good

  14. dstandish commented on Jan 3, 2022

    @dstandish
    Contributor

    Simplify KubernetesPodOperator (#19572)

    I tried different scenario it work correctly

    Thank you @raphaelauv

    I tested too... "works on my machine" ;)

  15. mrkm4ntr commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @mrkm4ntr
    Contributor

    #18966 works as expected.

  16. subkanthi commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @subkanthi
    Contributor

    checked and tested #20043

  17. dstandish commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @dstandish
    Contributor

    i checked off all the PRs related to the KubernetesPodOperator. installed provider and run it through test dags.

  18. potiuk commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @potiuk
    MemberAuthor

    Wooho. Getting quite good test coverage :) ! one more day to go !

  19. qgallet commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @qgallet
    Contributor

    #20553 works as expected !
    #19924 and #20237 are doc fixes.

    I believe #20575 can be marked as addressed on amazon and google provider since it's okay on kubernetes ;-)

  20. ericpp commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @ericpp
    Contributor

    #20433 is working great for me now!

  21. bugraoz93 commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @bugraoz93
    Contributor

    #19377 works as expected for both cases!

  22. dimon222 commented on Jan 4, 2022

    @dimon222
    Contributor

    #19726 briefly tested, seems to work as intended and not raising any problems.

  23. potiuk commented on Jan 5, 2022

    @potiuk
    MemberAuthor

    Last chance to make some quick testing :)

  24. josh-fell commented on Jan 6, 2022

    @josh-fell
    Contributor

    #20207, #20526, #20540, and #20347 look good!

  25. Bowrna commented on Jan 6, 2022

    @Bowrna
    Contributor

    #19873 verified the example DAG

  26. potiuk commented on Jan 6, 2022

    @potiuk
    MemberAuthor

    Thanks everyone for helping to thest that wave. It's been released !

  27. potiuk commented on Jan 6, 2022

    @potiuk
    MemberAuthor

    Thanks everyone for helping to thest that wave. It's been released !

  28. ssatia commented on Jan 14, 2022

    @ssatia
    Contributor

    #20264 works as expected. We had the unexpected occur again and it was handled correctly this time around 🙌

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    kind:metaHigh-level information important to the communitytesting statusStatus of testing releases

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions